The right sequence

[Hanoi5]

[hv=pc=n&w=sqt87642hadq5ct83&e=s9hkqj753da94caj6&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1hp1sp2hp2sp2np3sp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

You could say West got what he deserved. The contract couldn't be made but, was this the right level or strain? Was it the right sequence?

 

Should East jump to 3♥ to show a better than minimum hand? Would West be then advised to raise?

 

Is 2♠ passable? I've always thought 2♠ should show a better than minimum hand for responder can pass 2♥ with most bad hands.

 

Is 3♠ over 2NT correct? Is 4♠ good?

[ArtK78]

[hv=pc=n&w=sqt87642hadq5ct83&e=s9hkqj753da94caj6&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1hp1sp2hp2sp2np3sp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

 

You could say West got what he deserved. The contract couldn't be made but, was this the right level or strain? Was it the right sequence?

 

Should East jump to 3♥ to show a better than minimum hand? Would West be then advised to raise?

 

Is 2♠ passable? I've always thought 2♠ should show a better than minimum hand for responder can pass 2♥ with most bad hands.

 

Is 3♠ over 2NT correct? Is 4♠ good?

In thinking about this hand, I find that the last three calls are the ones that got this partnership in trouble. But the last call - 4♠ - was truly bad.

 

1♥ - clear

1♠ - clear

2♥ - a case could be made for 3♥, but 2♥ is certainly reasonable.

2♠ - clear. I am sure there are some out there who might bid 3♠ on these cards, but I am not one of them.

2NT - a bit of a stretch, but not entirely unreasonable. Opener has extra values, and if responder has a maximum for his 2♠ call, 3NT, 4♥ or 4♠ may have play. But opener should consider what will happen if responder is a minimum for his call. In that case, 2♠ may be the practical (not necessarily the best) contract.

3♠ - It is certainly very tempting to bid the spades one more time, but it might be better to bid 3♥ over 2NT or even to pass 2NT. I don't think that 3♠ is unreasonable, but playing QTxxxxx opposite a likely singleton at the 3 level could be very bad.

4♠ - I don't understand this call at all. Opener has done all that he could do to this point and responder said "I want to play a minimum number of spades" at every call. Maybe opener found another Ace that does not appear in the diagram.

[mikeh]

My take is a little different from Art's:

 

1. The first two calls are obvious

 

2. I agree with 2♥. If my shape were 3=6=1=3/3=6=3=1, my hand would be that much better and I'd be inclined to bid 3♥, even tho that makes reaching spades problematic

 

3. 2♠ is clear...the suit isn't good enough to bid an invitational 3♠

 

4. I think, and strongly, that East should pass. I'm not entirely sure what 2N should show.....in most analogous auctions (say 1♥ 1♠ 2♦ 2♠ 2N), it would show just under a jumpshift...a good 16+. Here, having shown 6+♥s, and not having jumped to 3♥, 2N is a pretty narrow target, but the reality is that it has to show a hand with game interest opposite a responder who has chosen not to invite...maybe a 6322 hand of some kind, with Hx in spades, 16 hcp and a suit too weak to warrant a 3♥ rebid at the second turn.

 

5. If I were West, I would give strong thought to bidding 4♠ now...I'd probably not because my suit isn't that good even if, as is often the case, partner holds a stiff honour.

 

6. 4♠ is lunacy.....firstly, East invites game and West declines. Now East, who lacked the values to invite game, accepts his own invitation.

[lalldonn]

2NT - a bit of a stretch, but not entirely unreasonable.

 

I think 2NT is entirely unreasonable.

[han]

I don't think that 2H is reasonable at all, it's awful. Oh let's quickly downgrade our hand because partner unexpectedly bid 1S over 1H and we have a singleton spade! No, we have a very good suit and a great 15-count, expecting partner to have 6 spades and a singleton heart just because he bid 1S is way too pessimistic. We would bid 2H with an ace less at least. This game is not about avoiding mediocre games, it's about finding our good games.

 

I understand that east bid over 2S because he underbid so much on the previous round. But unless you play weak jump shifts and 2S is highly constructive (a style some Europeans play) I don't think that east should ever be bidding here with a singleton spade. Perhaps east should never be bidding, period.

 

East completed his terrible sequence by bidding 4S over 3S.

[mikeh]

I don't think that 3H is reasonable at all, it's awful. Oh let's quickly downgrade our hand because partner unexpectedly bid 1S over 1H and we have a singleton spade! No, we have a very good suit and a great 15-count, expecting partner to have 6 spades and a singleton heart just because he bid 1S is way too pessimistic. We would bid 2H with an ace less at least. This game is not about avoiding mediocre games, it's about finding our good games.

 

I understand that east bid over 2S because he underbid so much on the previous round. But unless you play weak jump shifts and 2S is highly constructive (a style some Europeans play) I don't think that east should ever be bidding here with a singleton spade. Perhaps east should never be bidding, period.

 

East completed his terrible sequence by bidding 4S over 3S.

I'm not entirely sure I understood your post, but I think you meant to criticize 2♥ as unreasonable, and feel that a jump to 3♥ was far preferable.

 

However, do you really think that West should pass 3♥??? Really???

 

And if West bids over 3♥, he is committing to game in any method with which I am familiar.

 

Btw, what's all this nonsense about West 'unexpectedly' bidding 1♠? Where do any of the 2♥ bidders say that they chose the call because they were surprised by 1♠?

 

Speaking for myself, I choose 2♥ because I don't see the stiff in partner's suit as a positive....I go further, I see it as a negative. It wouldn't take much to make me choose 3♥...change a diamond spot to the J and it is clear....change the minors to A109 AJ9 and I'd do it....if only because those holdings grow up if partner bids 3N or if he raises, and the opps lead the expected minor.

[nigel_k]

I would bid 3♥ with East and end up in 4♠. It has some play I suppose. Sometimes you get too high when both players have promising looking hands and you don't discover until too late that they fit badly.

[han]

I'm not entirely sure I understood your post, but I think you meant to criticize 2♥ as unreasonable, and feel that a jump to 3♥ was far preferable.

 

When I said that I didn't think that 2H was reasonable at all, I indeed meant to criticize 2H as unreasonable.

 

However, do you really think that West should pass 3♥??? Really???

 

I know that some bridge players are result merchant but this beats everything. Since when should we look at the west hand in order to decide what the best bid for east is? I have said nothing about wests bidding!

 

This is too ridiculous for words. If I offended you by saying that I didn't think that 2H was a reasonable bid while 2H would have been your choice, I recommend that you either not take it personally or be offended, but at least try to make some sense.

[cherdano]

I would bid 3♥ not 2♥.

(Han your first post had a typo in the first line.)

[aguahombre]

I don't think it matters whether East should rebid 2H or 3H. He chose 2H as his valuation. What matters is that having chosen 2H, East made two subsequent bids which are inconsistent with that choice. 2S could have ended the auction; 3S could have ended the auction. If East has no green cards, he can borrow.

[y66]

It would be hard for me not to jump to 3H with East's hand. Don't know what I'd do with West's hand after 1H 1S 3H. Probably 4S.

 

Agree East should pass 2S.

[mikeh]

deleted some unkind things about han B-)

[han]

Thanks Arend!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Anything I might say is resulting here.

2S is weak... 3S is "weaker still"... BUT the ♠ bidder is really too weak to bid ♠ again.

Even 3H seems a stretch.

PASS ( over 2NT ).

[the_dude]

2♥ vs 3♥ = 30 years ago 2♥ would have been more reasonable ... but since most people today would open 1♥ without the A of Diamonds, then I think you need to bid 3♥ with this hand. Otherwise your 2♥ rebids have too wide a range. Partner will never know when to make a game try.

 

2NT = once you downgrade your hand to 2♥, how do you all of a sudden upgrade it to 2NT when partner rebids your singleton????

 

3♠ = given that partner has 0-1 spades and 80% of your values are in side suits, I have no clue why you are insisting on spades as trumps.

 

4♠ = to roller coaster of hand evaluation continues...

[mikeh]

The decision about 2♥ or 3♥ is very close. If you do bid 3♥, you are in game, and quite likely 3N......E will presumably bid 3N over 3♠, and now can West insist upon a major? I doubt it....with that heart A, he'll hope that partner has 6 heart tricks and 3 minor winners....not unreasonable, given his minor holdings.

 

However, if E does hold back and bid only 2♥, and then overbids via 2N, West can't, imo, pass that...his heart A is no longer quite as valuable, since there is no inference that opener has semi-solid hearts. I agree with the 3♠ pull.

 

As for whether the decision to bid 2♥ is being a result merchant, it is possible that I was influenced by seeing the result, but I don't think so...anyone who has read many of my posts knows that I often comment that I can't say how I would have acted, in a close situation, precisely because the post gave me knowledge of how any action would turn out.

 

It is unfortunate that han can't see that someone can legitimately hold an opinion that it different from his without being either unreasonable or a result merchant.

[Phil]

I didn't respond to Han's earlier post because I couldn't figure out if the typo was (un)reasonable or 2(3)♥.

 

Its kind of close for me, but I would bid 3♥.

[y66]

Bidding 2H there seems way less unreasonable than expecting someone who makes multiple careless posts to be more constructive in his criticism or more gentlemanly in acknowledging his annoying typos imho.

[Zelandakh]

2♥ vs 3♥ = 30 years ago 2♥ would have been more reasonable ... but since most people today would open 1♥ without the A of Diamonds, then I think you need to bid 3♥ with this hand. Otherwise your 2♥ rebids have too wide a range. Partner will never know when to make a game try.

 

Walter the Walrus would have no difficulties:-

10-12 = rebid 2♥ and decline a game try

13-15 = rebid 2♥ and accept a game try

16-18 = rebid 3♥

 

I would hope we can do at least as well as him. Anyway, I think that East should pass 2♠. In my preferred system the 2♠ rebid would be showing 8-9 rather than 6-10. I think this is where the problems of too wide a range are coming from.